Daniel Jackson Discussion and Appreciation

[Dani347]

I'm afraid I have too many issues with Heroes (thought it was a crappy farewell for Janet, hated Daniel's isolation) to enjoy it. The whole teddy bear thing was cute, but if Daniel could bring himself out of his misery enough to comfort the airman, why couldn't they have written him going to see one of the team? See how Jack was? See how Sam was holding up? Or, why not have one of the team go see him? Teal'c seek him out and him resist (which would still show his need to be alone?) or even have someone say "has anyone seen Daniel?" and then cut to him all alone? Didn't like.

[Deejay435]

I'm afraid I have too many issues with Heroes (thought it was a crappy farewell for Janet, hated Daniel's isolation) to enjoy it. The whole teddy bear thing was cute, but if Daniel could bring himself out of his misery enough to comfort the airman, why couldn't they have written him going to see one of the team? See how Jack was? See how Sam was holding up? Or, why not have one of the team go see him? Teal'c seek him out and him resist (which would still show his need to be alone?) or even have someone say "has anyone seen Daniel?" and then cut to him all alone? Didn't like.

Well fine, ruin it for me.

Seriously, I can see where you're coming from. (Not about Janet, I actually thought it was a great farewell for Janet.) But now that you mention it, Daniel was rather isolated. I'm going to have ponder on how I feel about that for a while.

[Dani347]

Well fine, ruin it for me.

I'm evil that way

[Rachel500]

I'm afraid I have too many issues with Heroes (thought it was a crappy farewell for Janet, hated Daniel's isolation) to enjoy it. The whole teddy bear thing was cute, but if Daniel could bring himself out of his misery enough to comfort the airman, why couldn't they have written him going to see one of the team? See how Jack was? See how Sam was holding up? Or, why not have one of the team go see him? Teal'c seek him out and him resist (which would still show his need to be alone?) or even have someone say "has anyone seen Daniel?" and then cut to him all alone? Didn't like.

Yes, it was strange how Daniel's 'comfort' moments all seemed to be with Simon Wells or with Bregman and not with another member of the team...

I quite like Heroes inasmuch as anyone can 'like' an epi that kills off a great character. I much prefer the build up in the first part to the second as I tend to agree with you that how they dealt with the aftermath of Janet's death first got lost in the tease of who was dead, and then the more socio/journalistic angle of the death being part of Bregman's doco rather than fully focusing on how the characters (and Cassie) were reacting to her death.

[Pitry]

*reads last post in thread*

This isn't the time to mention Meridian is my favourite episode in the entire show, then....

[Rachel500]

*reads last post in thread*

This isn't the time to mention Meridian is my favourite episode in the entire show, then....

I love the fact that Daniel gets a moment with each of his team-mates in Meridian and from a writing/quality perspective I think its well done, but I can't say I 'like' it...it always leaves me feeling sad. Of course, knowing he comes back makes it slightly more enjoyable now...

[discodiva]

I agree...it's extremely "hard" viewing in so far as it upsets me every time I see it

But the feel of the team love and respect for Daniel, at the crucial time he's questioning himself is wonderfully portrayed by all of them...

Deeds xx

[Dani347]

*reads last post in thread*

This isn't the time to mention Meridian is my favourite episode in the entire show, then....

That's fine. I don't really have a strong opinion on Meridian myself. Don't love it, and since I didn't start watching the show until season 7, the shock of him dying was diluted, so I don't hate it.

[golfbooy]

"Permission to barge right in, sir?" (To your discussion, that is.)

I've often read where posters say that Daniel's isolation in Heroes bothers them. My trouble is that I'm never quite certain as to what exactly they mean. When saying that Daniel being alone and mourning Janet's death by himself bothers you (you being all the wonderful folk who share this view), are you referring to your own feelings or to Daniel's? Do you mean it makes you (the poster) sad that Daniel is all by himself during this time and that you'd prefer someone there with him, or do you mean that it's not right for Daniel (the character) to be left to himself, that he's being written "wrong"? If it's the latter I disagree completely, but if it's the former, then, well, it's your opinion. Hmm, I suppose it's your opinion on the latter as well, but one I don't share. See, this whole post is a friggin' mess and I'm for sure not explaining myself clearly. C'est la vie.

My point, I suppose, is that Daniel's in-character, standard response to loss is self-imposed isolation and lonesome mourning. At least that's the way that I've always seen him. When we first meet Daniel, all the way back in the movie, he is all alone. He's got no one. And judgeing from the implied disconnect between Nick Ballard and Daniel in Crystal Skull, it doesn't appear that Daniel really reached out to anyone following his parents' demise. In Forever in Day it's Daniel who cuts off everyone else and leaves the SGC for "the remotest dig he (I) can find." The team all come to try to talk to him at various times, and he shuts each of them out in turn. The same follows in Ethon. Even locked in a cage with another, Daniel finds isolation to mourn the loss of his friends and the Prometheus crew. He sits there completely absorbed in his own grief and completely ignorant of Jared Kane's presence.

The difference in Meridian is that we aren't seeing Daniel deal with loss. There we get to see Jack, Sam, and Teal'c deal with loss. They're the ones who feel the need to reach out to Daniel. He's the one who has affected them. And it's their responses to his impending death that affect him. They're the ones who stop him from withdrawing into misery and self-reproach allowing him to gain the proper perspective needed to ascend.

So, when Daniel is left to himself in Heroes, I always see it as a conscious decison on Daniel's part. For me, that's how Daniel deals with loss. And on a slightly different note, I can't find it in my heart to hate Heroes. I'd dearly love to have Janet back at almost any cost, but Heroes is too well done to hate it. Clearly there are socio/journalistic and topical elements to the story, though I disagree that Janet's death got lost in them. Stargate chose to make Heroes not just about the death of Janet Frasier, but about something more, something grander and more meaningful. And I'm not just talking about the often touted "tribute to our military" stuff that always gets focused on. Heroes was something unique and special for SG-1, both the team and the show itself. That's pretty strong tribute to the character in my book. And I'm not fond of the term "red herring" to describe the O'neill-injury part of the story either. I don't see how that takes away from Janet's death. Is the viewer effected any less because O'neill, too, was injured? If it had been O'neill, could they have shown greater grief and despair from all involved? I'm of the belief that injuring Jack at the same time only served to enhance the significance of Janet's character. Even if it had been Jack, I can't see the team reacting any more viscerally than they did. Killing Frasier in the manner they did forever elevated her character to a par with the other main players (a place I don't feel she deserves, sorry). That's a pretty strong tribute to the character in my book, as well.

[Sprinkles]

"Permission to barge right in, sir?" (To your discussion, that is.)

Welcome! I often find your posts to reflect a logical and intelligent thinker.

I've often read where posters say that Daniel's isolation in Heroes bothers them. My trouble is that I'm never quite certain as to what exactly they mean. When saying that Daniel being alone and mourning Janet's death by himself bothers you (you being all the wonderful folk who share this view), are you referring to your own feelings or to Daniel's? Do you mean it makes you (the poster) sad that Daniel is all by himself during this time and that you'd prefer someone there with him, or do you mean that it's not right for Daniel (the character) to be left to himself, that he's being written "wrong"? If it's the latter I disagree completely, but if it's the former, then, well, it's your opinion. Hmm, I suppose it's your opinion on the latter as well, but one I don't share. See, this whole post is a friggin' mess and I'm for sure not explaining myself clearly. C'est la vie.

My point, I suppose, is that Daniel's in-character, standard response to loss is self-imposed isolation and lonesome mourning. At least that's the way that I've always seen him. When we first meet Daniel, all the way back in the movie, he is all alone. He's got no one. And judgeing from the implied disconnect between Nick Ballard and Daniel in Crystal Skull, it doesn't appear that Daniel really reached out to anyone following his parents' demise. In Forever in Day it's Daniel who cuts off everyone else and leaves the SGC for "the remotest dig he (I) can find." The team all come to try to talk to him at various times, and he shuts each of them out in turn. The same follows in Ethon. Even locked in a cage with another, Daniel finds isolation to mourn the loss of his friends and the Prometheus crew. He sits there completely absorbed in his own grief and completely ignorant of Jared Kane's presence.

I agree with your point that Daniel has often withdrawn himself in order to deal with his grief, so his isolation is not completley out of character, just that in past episodes, the ones you have specifically mentioned, the team has shown that Daniel dose not have to deal with these expereinces completley on his own. I know this episode was not 'about Daniel' but I guess for me it is more of a regret that some reference could have been made to the fact that he was also grieving and had lost someone he dearly cared about. As you said, it's a matter of opinion.

The difference in Meridian is that we aren't seeing Daniel deal with loss. There we get to see Jack, Sam, and Teal'c deal with loss. They're the ones who feel the need to reach out to Daniel. He's the one who has affected them. And it's their responses to his impending death that affect him. They're the ones who stop him from withdrawing into misery and self-reproach allowing him to gain the proper perspective needed to ascend.

Yes, I guess my point, they have shown they can be there for him even when he is withdrawing from everyone else. (Although in another light it was good that he could do that himself in in Hereos). - not quite sure if that makes sense lol

So, when Daniel is left to himself in Heroes, I always see it as a conscious decison on Daniel's part. For me, that's how Daniel deals with loss. And on a slightly different note, I can't find it in my heart to hate Heroes. I'd dearly love to have Janet back at almost any cost, but Heroes is too well done to hate it. Clearly there are socio/journalistic and topical elements to the story, though I disagree that Janet's death got lost in them. Stargate chose to make Heroes not just about the death of Janet Frasier, but about something more, something grander and more meaningful. And I'm not just talking about the often touted "tribute to our military" stuff that always gets focused on. Heroes was something unique and special for SG-1, both the team and the show itself. That's pretty strong tribute to the character in my book. And I'm not fond of the term "red herring" to describe the O'neill-injury part of the story either. I don't see how that takes away from Janet's death. Is the viewer effected any less because O'neill, too, was injured? If it had been O'neill, could they have shown greater grief and despair from all involved? I'm of the belief that injuring Jack at the same time only served to enhance the significance of Janet's character. Even if it had been Jack, I can't see the team reacting any more viscerally than they did. Killing Frasier in the manner they did forever elevated her character to a par with the other main players (a place I don't feel she deserves, sorry). That's a pretty strong tribute to the character in my book, as well.

Like you I do not hate Heroes at all, I loved the Janet Fraiser character and hold no resentment at all to any elevation layed upon her in that episode. Although I still think the 'is it Fraiser or is it O'Neill' was alittle unfortunate to be left as a cliffhanger for part of that episode (but thats just me )

[Rachel500]

golfbooy, speaking for myself, Daniel's isolation doesn't 'bother me' so much as I think its strange that within Heroes pt 2, we don't get a scene of him interacting with any of his team-mates regarding his grief and his reaction.

I think your analysis of how Daniel reacts to grief is spot on but I personally would have liked a scene where he's shown turning away/pushing away from his team-mates a la Forever in a Day rather than simply showing his isolation. I think its the contrast; we see Sam and Jack providing support to one another and another with Sam and Teal'c even Sam and Hammond...yet Daniel's alone. He may choose to be but it would have been good to have seen him make the choice especially when he is seen reaching out to Airman Wells (which may be down to the sense of shared guilt over Janet's death/shared experience/Daniel's innate compassion overriding his desire for isolation) in comparison against no scene with Jack, another one of Daniel's close friends who came close to dying that day...

I don't hate Heroes either; like I say I like it inasmuch as it was a good two episodes of Stargate even if it did kill off a character. But, for me, the second part doesn't work well as the first. I personally would have preferred to spend more time on the reactions of the team and the fallout from Janet's death then on Bregman's documentary.

I have no issue with O'Neill getting injured at the same time but there is a section of the episode where Bregman is trying to find out what happened which is deliberately written to tease the audience with is it O'Neill who has died? Whose death would cause such anguish for our characters? Time is spent on this that could have been spent on the actual aftermath for SG1 and the wider SGC instead. For me, I'd prefer it if they had just admitted upfront it was Janet, maybe after the Sam walking/crying scene. And for me Bregman's 'convincing' of his air force team that the truth is important, the journalistic value in showing the warts and all, and them finding out what happened is effectively the same conversation that takes place between Daniel and Bregman over the tape. Both Bregman's scene with his airforce team and his conversation with Daniel provide the same result; that it all ends up adding up to a better documentary, a more real look at the SGC including the fact that people die and not just a 'we are the SGC, aren't we great piece' promo. I think one of these would have been sufficient and that's what I mean about the aftermath of Janet's death getting lost amongst the tease and Bregman's documentary; nothing to do with how well Heroes paid tribute to Janet and all about how much time was spent on SG1 reactions vs Bregman's documentary (and the Jack tease is part of the documentary theme).

I'm not saying the documentary/socio/political aspect wasn't an important message for Heroes to convey but they might have provided themselves with more time for other reactions scenes by just say losing the Bregman trying to find out who had died/teasing the audience with the was it Jack stuff; maybe they could have shown Wells with his SG team if they wanted to maintain the 'wider' SGC focus or dare I suggest even including a scene of Daniel choosing to be by himself by refusing the comfort of a team-mate, or him being compassionate and seeing how Jack was like he had comforted Airman Wells...that's just MHO.

[Dani347]

golfbooy, my answer to your question is basically Sprinkles' answer. I don't mind that Daniel wanted to hide away (although it kind of ruins it that he went and sought out the airman. Where was his need for isolation, then?). I didn't mind that. I minded that none of the team looked for Daniel or asked about him. I mean, he saw Janet die! Teal'c shares a moment with Sam (which is fine, I'm not upset that it happened). Sam goes to see Jack which in the abstract is okay (better leave out the editorializing I have on that scene). They show they care about each other. Why didn't one of them even ask where Daniel was or how he was doing? Hammond was the only one who actually saw Daniel (until the memorial service -where Daniel was on the other side of everyone) and not one question to him on how he was doing. Even though he did ask Sam. Which again, is fine. Janet was her best friend, not to mention close to all of them. She'd have a difficult time dealing with it, and I could see Hammond asking her. But, why not ask Daniel, too? Seeing as Daniel saw Janet die? Why didn't anyone express any concern? I know the episode was about Janet, but I'm protective of my bespectacled archeologist.

One line, one person saying, "where's Daniel?" would have shown something, without taking away from the isolation (it was supposed to be his isolation, not theirs) and they could have cut away to him alone in the infirmary.

And, I see that Rachel500 has also pretty much posted my thoughts.

Barge in anytime.

[golfbooy]

Welcome! I often find your posts to reflect a logical and intelligent thinker.

Ha, ha, fooled you. There's a magnificient pandemonium going on in that head of mine. But thanks for the compliment.

I agree with your point that Daniel has often withdrawn himself in order to deal with his grief, so his isolation is not completley out of character, just that in past episodes, the ones you have specifically mentioned, the team has shown that Daniel dose not have to deal with these expereinces completley on his own. I know this episode was not 'about Daniel' but I guess for me it is more of a regret that some reference could have been made to the fact that he was also grieving and had lost someone he dearly cared about. As you said, it's a matter of opinion.

Yup. They kind of substituted Bregman for Jack or Sam or Teal'c as the one Daniel tells to "back off". Hey, no doubt I'd also have loved a Daniel/anybody scene to go along with the Jack/Sam, Sam/Teal'c, Hammond/Sam ones we got. But that's on my wish list for the episode, not my criticism list. That said, I think that Saul Rubinek is a wonderful actor that almost always comes through with a great performance. I've loved him in Star Trek, The Outer Limits, Frasier, Unforgiven, etc., and I think his work in Heroes is no exception. So maybe that's making me like him more here than others.

Yes, I guess my point, they have shown they can be there for him even when he is withdrawing from everyone else. (Although in another light it was good that he could do that himself in in Hereos). - not quite sure if that makes sense lol

It makes perfect sense. It's a shame that we didn't see the others reaching out, but great that Daniel was written and played so completely in-character and true to his nature.

Like you I do not hate Heroes at all, I loved the Janet Fraiser character and hold no resentment at all to any elevation layed upon her in that episode. Although I still think the 'is it Fraiser or is it O'Neill' was alittle unfortunate to be left as a cliffhanger for part of that episode (but thats just me )

Nah, it's not just you. Lots of others feel the same way. Just not me.

[golfbooy]

golfbooy, speaking for myself, Daniel's isolation doesn't 'bother me' so much as I think its strange that within Heroes pt 2, we don't get a scene of him interacting with any of his team-mates regarding his grief and his reaction.

...I personally would have liked a scene where he's shown turning away/pushing away from his team-mates a la Forever in a Day rather than simply showing his isolation....

Right. As I said in my reply to Sprinkles, I see this as more of a wish list item rather than a criticism. In a story already so full of huge character moments and huge plot moments and huge socio-political statements to be made, I get why there's no such scene. For the record, I'd have loved to have had more Jack in the episode, period. The deleted scene with Jack at his house that was posted at Scifi really did belong in the episode.

I don't hate Heroes either; like I say I like it inasmuch as it was a good two episodes of Stargate even if it did kill off a character. But, for me, the second part doesn't work well as the first. I personally would have preferred to spend more time on the reactions of the team and the fallout from Janet's death then on Bregman's documentary.

Fair enough. I'm the opposite, by the way. If I had to choose between the two, I'd say the second part beats the first to a bloody pulp. However, that's not how I look at Heroes. When it comes to Stargate two-parters I see some as two episodes that are connected and some that are just one big episode cut in half. Prometheus and Unnatural Selection is an example of the former, while Heroes or Lost City or Jolinar's Memories and The Devil You Know are examples of the latter. All of Heroes is, to me, the same story. And even during that funny first half, there is quietly building tension and sense of foreboding to the story. Couched in jokes is the escalating situation on the planet, which is excellently foreshadowed by the uncharacteristically grim walk and talk the team does at the end of part one. It's an example of the writer (RCC) slowly pushing the proverbial rock all the way up the hill. He just doesn't push it over until the second half of the story.

[golfbooy]

golfbooy, my answer to your question is basically Sprinkles' answer. I don't mind that Daniel wanted to hide away (although it kind of ruins it that he went and sought out the airman. Where was his need for isolation, then?). I didn't mind that. I minded that none of the team looked for Daniel or asked about him. I mean, he saw Janet die! Teal'c shares a moment with Sam (which is fine, I'm not upset that it happened). Sam goes to see Jack which in the abstract is okay (better leave out the editorializing I have on that scene). They show they care about each other. Why didn't one of them even ask where Daniel was or how he was doing? Hammond was the only one who actually saw Daniel (until the memorial service -where Daniel was on the other side of everyone) and not one question to him on how he was doing. Even though he did ask Sam. Which again, is fine. Janet was her best friend, not to mention close to all of them. She'd have a difficult time dealing with it, and I could see Hammond asking her. But, why not ask Daniel, too? Seeing as Daniel saw Janet die? Why didn't anyone express any concern? I know the episode was about Janet, but I'm protective of my bespectacled archeologist.

One line, one person saying, "where's Daniel?" would have shown something, without taking away from the isolation (it was supposed to be his isolation, not theirs) and they could have cut away to him alone in the infirmary.

And, I see that Rachel500 has also pretty much posted my thoughts.

Barge in anytime.

I get what you're all saying. Really, I do. And I would have loved to have seen such a scene as you guys describe. I just find it hard to criticise the episode for a lack of team caring and understanding in the wake of so much teamy goodness. All I see when I watch Heroes is great caring interaction among Teal'c, Carter, Hammond, O'neill, and yes, even Daniel. Daniel is the only one save Bregman who gets to actually have a scene with Janet. He's the one who gets to be there when she dies, and he's the one who gets to be there as they work on Wells. In that scene, I think Michael Shanks and Teryl Rothery do a great job of showing just how intuitively close Daniel and Janet are. Their absolute trust in each other's capabilities and mettle while showing grim compassion for Wells is part of what makes that battle sequence so fantastic for me. I don't know, I just have a hard time feeling like Daniel lost out in Heroes.

This feeling is buoyed by the fact that back in those days I never felt like I had to worry about team interaction. I knew that Jack, Sam, Teal'c, and Daniel all cared about each other. It was demonstrated to me over and over. It's only in recent seasons that I feel like the relationships among the original three have been neglected by the writers in favor of relationships with the new characters. Now, Daniel's only interaction with anyone seems to be almost exclusively with Vala. But that's a different argument altogether.